Re: [xmpp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-xmpp-posh-04: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 05 August 2015 16:20 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A665F1A1AC9; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 09:20:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.311
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hVqxm1fbbXvg; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 09:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFF871A1AAE; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 09:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A019BE58; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 17:20:30 +0100 (IST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0jzKoQUult0m; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 17:20:30 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [134.226.36.180] (stephen-think.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.180]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C635ABE9C; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 17:20:29 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1438791629; bh=dM+zGZAX3a5wULI98g8EITRSkSHx6BdwNthho3zmXok=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZFzP8uY/3KQwkOCiCvDhrgPCv1fSXlGufYNgILM71JgaO10lA3GI/N6ebpeNGA0Iy M3OhvOUB2fN/8aMYJk2JKfLei4AmK87tz3Yhnorkrx8SdNIcVJFil0TZGcb2z0Ckqx 1LwBgmZV4Ne9PdUNTp5/a1/GCwf19Wts4hFZl9zo=
Message-ID: <55C237CD.1060000@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 17:20:29 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
References: <20150805150244.8466.87044.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CALaySJLgzUMwv2inUSByD5Oz13kscTq1-XWePvTa2OPpDH8U3A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJLgzUMwv2inUSByD5Oz13kscTq1-XWePvTa2OPpDH8U3A@mail.gmail.com>
OpenPGP: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xmpp/V-ndKuSxBdx-cgtGn4jVfu-sEsc>
Cc: draft-ietf-xmpp-posh.shepherd@ietf.org, xmpp-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-xmpp-posh.ad@ietf.org, xmpp@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-xmpp-posh@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [xmpp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-xmpp-posh-04: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <xmpp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/xmpp/>
List-Post: <mailto:xmpp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 16:20:36 -0000


On 05/08/15 17:06, Barry Leiba wrote:
>> section 8: I dislike the "{servicedesc}" thing, but
>> that's just me. Breaking down servicedesc further into
>> "{service}.{proto}" is worse though, I don't get why
>> that's a good idea at all, nor the "_" convention. If
>> you want/need all that you should've just registered
>> "posh" as a well-known and then said the the rest of the
>> pathname was whatever structure you needed and not
>> possibly end up registering loads of DNA .well-known
>> URLs.
> 
> Yep... I made a similar comment, which Peter and I have been
> discussing.  He's mulling over what to do.

Thanks - I saw that go by but didn't follow. Best
to continue in that other thread I'd say.

S

> 
> Barry
>